City Protective Services (CPS) law enforcement officer Kiera Cameron (Rachel Nichols) lives a quiet, normal life with her husband and son in 2077-era Vancouver. Under the corporatocratic and oligarchic dystopia of the North American Union and its "Corporate Congress", life goes on in apparent freedom under a technologically-advanced high-surveillance police state.
When a group of self-proclaimed freedom fighters known as "Liber8" escape execution by fleeing to the year 2012, Kiera is involuntarily transported with them into the past. Joining with Detective Carlos Fonnegra (Victor Webster) and the Vancouver Police Department, and enlisting the help of teen computer genius Alec Sadler (Erik Knudsen), Kiera works to track down and thwart Edouard Kagame (Tony Amendola) and his followers in the present day while concealing her identity as a time-traveler from the future.
we all know how certain places censor everything. This is why the MPAA and RIAA need to put on a leash at the least because that story above is our future if we don't. And we need no map of the dark censor laden areas of the world to do it.
Why is every single thing that Space X and Tesla does posted on Slashdot?
I agree. I am a big fan of Musk and SpaceX but there is no chance in hell that SpaceX would be developing these systems without self-destruct capability. Might as well praise Google for ensuring their self-driving cars have brakes.
Funny that you would choice that considering Google didn't put them in. http://guardianlv.com/2014/08/...
Google has been developing the world’s first driverless car, though their efforts have been restrained by being forced to add a steering wheel and pedals. Originally, the concept of the car was to be able to drive itself, leaving the person in control of nothing, but a single button to begin their route. The Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) in California has ruled that drivers must have the ability to take control of the vehicle in case the software malfunctions, there is an accident, or an emergency situation presents itself. Dmitri Dolgov, the lead software engineer of this project, admitted that their technology was not perfect, and the cars had the habit of sometimes going over the speed limit. He explained this by stating the driverless cars had the ability to go 10 mph over the speed limit, as opposed to sticking to it to keep up with traffic. Dolgov’s reasoning behind the cars’ ability to exceed the speed limit was to keep up with the traffic, when it is speeding and avoid road rage or cause obstructions in the road.
Deceleration was the braking mechanism Google chose to use.
Nice pun asshole. Challenger had no ejection system. NASA considered in infeasible to provide ejection capability for 7 people. The commander and pilot could have had an ejection seat system, but the idea of having two crew members escape while the other 5 are left to die was (rightly) unpalatable.
Because Having 7 die was so much better as proven when Columbia exploded on return. NASA was greedy and lazy.
This really moves SpaceX up in my estimation as well. Until now, I pictured private space flight as focusing only on making profits, not sacrificing dollars in order to protect people around them. Maybe the privatization of space flight has a future after all!
Uhhh, yeah, let me know how well the PR monkey handles explaining to the general public that your loved ones aboard their dream vacation to space were blown up on purpose as a safety measure.
Good luck with that shit.
Funny thing is that your statement is modded negative 1. So obviously no one will give a flying squirrel.
Sure, in an imaginary world where the graceful and faithful elephant works freakishly hard to make the ants live happy lives even though the ants are so tiny to imagine what this great elephant looks like or means to them. The ants who hate the elephant drown themselves in puddles of water, and we the outsider look at these drowning ants in this imaginary world and think "these ungratefully stupid ants deserve to be eliminated by natural selection." And the elephant looks at us and say "if we can save one more ant from drowning, then why don't we?"
Well, that is a good question. What can't we? Also another good question is: How do we know we aren't already inside a black hole? No one has ever been to one or seen its inside so all we have is good guesses.
Do you have a link? I've never heard of "peak phosphorus' before.
Google is your friend. http://www.americanscientist.o...